OT: UGA Basketball team policies
I found this piece on SB Nation which at first seemed a little funny. When I read it and read the small pieces included from the Bulldog's policy for basketball players, it became interesting.
The author from SBN thinks that some of the rules are "weird" or "ridiculous" or "go off the deep end." From my perspective, what is weird is that some of the things on the list need to be listed as policies at all. They should be expected for an athlete who represents their university. The other ones that I imagine he thinks are off the deep end address character issues that I think a coach and athletic program should expect from their players if they take character seriously.
Just my own opinions, but curious to hear what you all think about these policies.
Discuss.
If they don't like it, they don't have to play for him. There are worse things a coach could do. If all athletic programs in the country moved more toward BYU's code of conduct, our athletes would probably be better off.
BYU's code of conduct is so ass-backward that I doubt anyone would be better off using it as a target to move towards.
Yes, it would be ass backwards if student-athletes:
Be honest
Live a chaste and virtuous life
Obey the law and all campus policies
Use clean language
Respect others
Abstain from alcoholic beverages, tobacco, tea, coffee, and substance abuse
Participate regularly in church services
Observe the Dress and Grooming Standards
Encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code
Just awful.
The caffeine rule is busch league but then again you dont have to go there.
Some people (who are very good, decent human beings) do indeed see some of the items listed in here as ass backwards. However, if you go to BYU and you're the kind of person that disagrees with these and can't maintain said standards, well then you are the ass backwards one for ever thinking BYU was the right place for you to begin with.
March 27th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^
Agreed, and I did not mean to imply that those who disagree with some of those standards aren't decent human beings. I for one don't agree with everything on that list (I need coffee and the occasional alcoholic beverage). But as a general foundation for what an honor code should look like? More good than bad, I think.
March 27th, 2014 at 10:13 AM ^
about the other stuff on the list. However, YOU MUST OBEY THE GROOMING STANDARDS.
March 27th, 2014 at 11:51 AM ^
Maybe a less inflammatory adjective than "ass backwards" was in order, but do you really think that kind of code would be appropriate at a public university? BYU is one thing--it's a church school. But you're calling for this as a model for other schools. What business would a public insitution have regulating the religous practices of its students by, for example, requiring them to "participate regularly in church services"?
The question isn't whether going to church is good or bad, it's whether it's the school's or coach's business to observe and intervene.
That goes for a lot of what's on the Georgia list, too. I'd argue the same about consensual sexual relations, for example, though the first amendment implications aren't as absolutely crystal clear as they are with religion.
March 27th, 2014 at 11:58 AM ^
I should clarify. Obviously I'm not arguing for compulsory church service or anything like that. I said if athletic programs "moved more toward" BYU's code of conduct, it probably would be a good thing. I don't think it should be adopted in its entirety. I think going to church is a great thing for young kids to do, but I certainly would not advocate requiring it at a secular institution. I agree with you completely.
I picked out church as the low-hanging fruit, but I think I have basically the same objection to the entire process.
To me ethics revolves around fairly vague concepts like "consent" and "respect" and "responsibility". We have legal codes to deal with extreme cases, but most of the business of figuring out how to live an ethical life is in the gray area this side of the law where the meaning and relative importance of those words is constantly being negotiated. It's the business of a public school to facilitate that negotiation, not to take sides (except, again, for extreme cases, like when student safety is involved).
So a rule like "treat women with respect" isn't so problematic. There's general consensus that that's a good thing. It's when you impose a legalistic behavioral code onto "respect" that it becomes a problem. A particular individual deciding on his own that "respect" means serial heterosexual monogamy without visible marks of passion and then imposing that belief on the basketball program? There's no consensus there; that's not how public institutions are supposed to work.
And as a practical matter I think rigid rules like this tend to backfire--they give people something to push against. At best they're more symptom than cure. I'll tell you this--if I were a high school basketball recruit I'd have no interest in playing for a coach that thinks it's his business to barge into my dorm room any time he pleases to find out who I'm sleeping with. Partly because I like to be treated with more respect than that, but mostly because I'd want to be part of a program where rules like that aren't seen as necessary because the players have enough self-discipline to be able to police themselves.
As to the practical aspect of it, I think you find much less trouble at institutions like BYU and the service academies than you would where a great deal of self-policing takes place. This may be because the individuals who choose to go there are already disciplined in the first place, so there are less problems, or it may be because those institutions promote a culture of discipline that helps form a sort of collective mindset that ensures discipline. And likely, it is some combination of the two.
As to the rest of your argument, well put. I would just say that the consensus you spoke of is constantly changing. I'm not so sure that most college programs emphasize treating women with respect, or at least the players certainly don't act that way. The fact that the consensus is constantly evolving is what concerns me. I don't think college athletics from a moral, ethical perspective is heading in the right direction. It is debatable whether institution-wide policies would be able to effect change, and I am skeptical of that as well. But reasonable minds can differ.
Socially, Oberlin College is about as far from BYU or a service academy as you could possibly get. But they have an academic honor code that's similar in certain respects. Students are responsible for policing academic cheating, and every student commits in writing that they will report any cheating they become aware of. Not just responsible for it, but entirely responsible--the proctoring of exams is prohibited. The professor hands out the exam, stays for a few minutes to answer questions, then leaves until the exam is over. (They can, if they say in advance theyr'e going to do it, return at some point along the way in case there any further questions come up.)
And people there DO NOT CHEAT. There was one case of plagiarism in my four years there, and I remember it well because it was so rare. You can give students a timed take-home exam and they'll stop writing in the middle of the sentence when their three hours are up.
I honestly thought it was like that everywhere.
I did one year of grad school at Illinois, and got a first small shock when I found out the TAs were expected to proctor the exams. I got a much bigger shock during the first exam when I looked around the room and locked eyes with a student who was watching me to see if I'd noticed that he was trying to copy from the girl next to him.
I hadn't thought that possible. If that had happened when I was an undergrad ten people would have seen it and at least nine and probably all ten of them would have turned him in.
You expect people to act like responsible adults and police themselves, and they do. You expect people to cheat and you set up a system to monitor it, and they try to beat the system.
Now I'm sure there are differences between the student bodies at the two schools, but I don't think that's fundamentally what's going on here. It's not that a disciplined student body makes the system work, it's that over time the system produces the discipline. Students know what's expected of them by their fellow students, they learn the cultural norms of the place, they live up to them.
I think it's possible to do that in an athletic program too. Bo Ryan seems to have done it--he's famous for having few rules, no curfew, etc. The players have learned to take care of that stuff themselves.
Imagine you're a freshman, you come to campus and there's Zak Novak and Stu Douglass keeping their noses clean and working their butts off. And then it's Stauskas and McGary, and later it'll be Caris Lavert....
If you come into a program and the upperclassmen are diligent and hard-working and disciplined, you try to fit in. If the upperclassmen are treating campus life as a world of unlimited privilege and entitlement, you try to fit in.
It's not easy to transition from one kind of program to the other, I'll grant you that.
March 27th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
only about half of this list has much to do with being a good student-athlete or person
chaste (about what % of Michigan's student body is chaste, at least by choice)
clean language (you must not like it on this blog)
alcohol, tobacco, tea and coffee (I heard there are Starbucks on campus....and bars)
church services (fine for those who are religious--not much for personal liberty)
dress and grooming (pretty sure most AA students wouldn't meet this requirement in Provo).
your argument goes well beyond "that's what the athlete signed up for"
just sayin'
If you go to BYU, you certainly do sign up for those things. I go to Michigan, so I sign up something much different. Sorry everyone, it wasn't my intent wasn't to ignite a culture war on the blog. My apologies.
you didn't limit your argument to a religious school like BYU--you projected it as reasonable/desirable everywhere. I agree that if you choose to go to BYU that you can be expected to adhere to that school's code of conduct.
Appearance is important, but there might be an issue with with the 'no braids'
that proper appearance and braids are incompatable.
The only way his crack will show is if he splits his suit pants celebrating. I guess it shows the character of many of the UGA recruits. I know when playing street ball there are a few respectful young men out there, but not the majority.
Go Beilein go!
March 27th, 2014 at 10:31 AM ^
What the hell are you talking about? "Street ball?" There are only "a few respectful young men out there, but not the majority?"
Generalize much?
"From my perspective, what is weird is that some of the things on the list need to be listed as policies at all. They should be expected for an athlete who represents their university."
So you just don't like the list format then?
no, that's not what I meant....I mean...
Shit.
(well played)
So the head coach wants the students to be respectful, look presentable in public, maintain a living area that is both presentable and safe, as well as wanting his athletes to be respectful to women. At least that's my takeaway from the list. And as much as we might think it seems odd to write it down, its a whole lot easier to enforce if you write it down and hand it to the kid. Plus, when they're being recruited, they know about these rules and they have the choice to attend the school or not.
It just changes hour to hour who she is.
It's nice to see he's open minded. I'm assuming multiple boyfriends is fine.
For some reason, the potential worst case scenario comes to mind - that might be my dad's story about "Dean McDonald" coming round to a frat party in 1962 and offering this Dean a brew, not realizing - as he was on his way to buzzed - that he was "THE Dean, Dr. McDonald" coming around to introduce himself to students. Yes, apparently awkward moments were had by all.
March 27th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^
I would say his career went down the tubes, but he's apparently done okay since getting the broom at Iowa State. 184-138 with NCAA tournament appearances at both jobs (Southern Miss and Colorado State.
It will keep the players accountable along with the coaches.
The gall of that coach telling his players they can't strut around with their butt crack showing or engaging in a gang bang.
March 27th, 2014 at 10:14 AM ^
Endlessly condescending and snarkily contemptuous of anybody who even attempts to instill a code of ethics relating to young men's sexual behavior and attitudes towards women. LOL what a loser nerd that coach is.
But if his own daughter was ever assaulted by one of those young men, he'd be speed-dialing 911 and screaming for a SWAT team to take the guy out on the spot.
March 27th, 2014 at 10:33 AM ^
I don't think having multiple consenting partners constitues as assault. A lot of people are in non-monogomous relationships and are perfectly happy, well-adjusted people. It's absolutely an acceptable response to call the cops if you or your children is assaulted, even if you have a progressive attitude towards sex.
March 27th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
How can I trust what you've said in your first paragraph to be true without any kind of proof? If you could provide a few examples then I would probably side with that. Then in the second part of your post you make a huge leap at what this guy will do in a theoretical situation. uhhhhhh.....
March 27th, 2014 at 10:36 AM ^
Guess you better get them where they don't show, amirite??!!
/walksoutdoor
March 27th, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^